Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about congestion zone charges. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault by Transport for London to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains Transport for London (TfL) charged him for entering the congestion charge zone via his auto-pay account, despite the fact he no longer owned the vehicle. As a result, he has paid a total of more than £250 for incursions into the congestion charge zone by the new owner of the vehicle. Mr X is also unhappy TfL has charged him even after he told TfL he no longer owns the vehicle.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Authority.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X previously owned a vehicle which he registered with TfL on his auto-pay account. This meant that each time the vehicle entered the congestion charge zone TfL would automatically take payment from him. This allowed him to benefit from a discounted rate and ensured he would not receive Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) for entering the zone without paying the charge.
6. Mr X says he sold the vehicle more than two years ago, but he did not remove the vehicle from his auto-pay account. As a result, when the new owner drove into the congestion charge zone on several occasions, TfL charged Mr X via his auto-pay account. Mr X says he received emails saying his auto-pay account statement was available, but the emails did not say he owed any money. Mr X is also unhappy because he told TfL on 17 September 2020 he had sold his car. But on 21 September, he was charged for the vehicle entering the congestion zone on 06 September.
7. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. TfL was not at fault for charging Mr X via his auto-pay account when his former vehicle entered the congestion charge zone. The vehicle remained registered on Mr X’s account, and it was for him to remove the details when he sold it. TfL cannot know that Mr X disposed of the vehicle and because it was registered on his account, TfL could not charge the new owner or issue PCNs for non-payment.
8. TfL’s auto-pay user guide clearly explains how to remove a vehicle from an auto-pay account. The issue in this case appears simply to be that Mr X did not realise he should remove the vehicle from his account. That is not fault by TfL. It is also not fault by TfL that Mr X did not log into his account to see if there were any charges. Mr X’s former vehicle entered the congestion zone on 06 September, eleven days before he told TfL he no longer owned the vehicle. Mr X therefore remained liable for any charges from the vehicle entering the congestion zone. There is not enough evidence of fault by TfL for us to investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman